A marriage proposal: privatize it.

• Author: Jones, Colin P.A.

A fundamental problem with marriage is that it comes in only one size. As a legal relationship, matrimony is a monopoly product supplied by the government. s a personal relationship, however, the institution is one of unique, personal importance to those who partake of it; to some, it even has deeply felt religious significance. Thus, in essence, a mismatch exists between what is demanded of marriage and what is supplied. This imbalance makes the prospect of same-sex unions a seemingly intractable problem: with only one legally sanctioned version of marriage available, those who (rightly or wrongly) view homosexuality as a mortal sin are hostile to the prospect of sharing it with gay couples.

As with many things in life, a free-market approach that offers people a choice may provide a solution. As one of the oldest types of contractual relationship, marriage has always been a form of partnership. Subject to certain statutory constraints, businesspeople have long been free to form whatever sort of partnership they consider appropriate to their needs. Why not make the same flexibility possible for marriage? We have already moved in that direction in some respects: no-fault divorce states, such as California, treat the dissolution of a marriage in much the same way as the dissolution of a business partnership.

Couples entering into marriage should also be allowed to use a partnership agreement tailored to their own circumstances and aspirations, one that reflects the values and expectations that they themselves attach to marriage. Of course, not everyone can draft a workable partnership agreement to govern a lifelong (one hopes) relationship, so lawyers and other private enterprises would develop off the-shelf marital partnership kits to fill this need, just as suppliers have developed kits and other legal documents already available in bookstores and online. Customized products would be available to those willing to pay for them.

Even greater efficiencies might be achieved through the establishment of marital corporations (MCs), each having hundreds or thousands of couples as stockholders, all sharing common values about marriage. Couples getting married would subscribe to the shares of an existing MC, whose charter documents would set forth the terms of the type of marriage to which the subscribing couples agree.

Thus, a plethora of choices might be made available to prospective newlyweds. A Catholic MC would forbid its members to divorce. Progressive MCs would allow gay marriage. Islamic or Mormon MCs would allow polygamy. Plain vanilla MCs would probably be popular among people who just want to get married without thinking about it too much. In any event, numerous options would be available, and consideration of these options might actually encourage people to think about what they want out of their marriage. When individuals with strong feelings about homosexuals, divorcees, Republicans, or other "disfavored" types of people can exclude such people...